lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/6] fat: add fat_fallocate operation
Date
Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@gmail.com> writes:

>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> + /* Release unwritten fallocated blocks on inode eviction. */
>>>> + if (MSDOS_I(inode)->mmu_private < MSDOS_I(inode)->i_disksize) {
>>>> + int err;
>>>> + fat_truncate_blocks(inode, MSDOS_I(inode)->mmu_private);
>>>> + /* Fallocate results in updating the i_start/iogstart
>>>> + * for the zero byte file. So, make it return to
>>>> + * original state during evict and commit it
>>>> + * synchrnously to avoid any corruption on the next
>>>> + * access to the cluster chain for the file.
>>>> + */
>>>> + err = fat_sync_inode(inode);
>>>
>>> Ah, good catch. We have to update i_size. I was forgetting about this.
>>> Well, sync inode unconditionally would not be good. Maybe, we better to
>>> use __fat_write_inode() with inode_needs_sync() or such.
>> Okay, I will change it.
> Hi OGAWA
>
> When I checked more, we should wait till inode is sync. Because in the
> eviction it will leave the inode/buffers being marked dirty.
> Not waiting for it get sync over here. It will leave cluster chain
> corrupted when remounting.
> It mean we cannot use __fat_write_inode with inode_needs_sync() conditionally.

Yeah, this situation bothers us. However, the inode is not marked as
dirty after I_FREEING. And in fatfs case, all related dirty buffers
should goes into blockdev inode buffers (i.e. metadata only), right?

So, I thought sync is not necessary.

Thanks.
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-14 09:21    [W:0.034 / U:2.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site